The Federal Reserve


23
Apr 12

Collateral Damage Revisited, or “Merda Incorporated?”

In the early days of the financial crisis, I raised the issue of whether or not secure lending can take place when the quality of collateral erodes.  Currently, much collateral has shifted from the heavy iron of factories, land and equipment to more ephemeral forms:  hard-to-value intangibles like software, patents, human capital, and the like.  See Collateral Damage.   Until recently, I had not given much thought to this shift.  Then, within the space of several recent days, three articles appeared which have questioned the solidity of the underlying collateral which now purport to support our vast financial lending pyramid:

The essence of these articles: financial institutions, and more importantly the central banks of governments, are sitting on a vast amount of seriously devalued or worthless collateral.  In layman’s language regarding this flawed empire of debt: “the emperor has no clothes.”

The LTRO Program

The Long Term Refinancing Operation (“LTRO”) is a program of the European Central Bank (“ECB”).  This program permits unlimited lending to banks and, importantly, relaxes acceptable forms of collateral.   Its purpose was to relieve worsening credit conditions in Europe. See LTRO: A User’s Manual for a more complete discussion.  Although initially greeted with acclaim and stock and bond market rallies both in Europe and the US, its effect quickly wore off.

Italian banks took €354 billion in LTRO cash and Spanish banks took around €300 billion. Portuguese bank dependence on ECB borrowing rose to a record €56 billion. So in total, these countries’ insolvent banks have now placed over €710 billion in merda collateral with the ECB. The fact that these infected banks are halting trading about every other day should also be transmitting in spades the signal that the ECB literally owns said banks and inherits their losses and their merda collateral, which has been pawned off.

In truth, only four European countries backstop all of the ECB, EFSF [“European Financial Stabilization Fund” edit.], and other schemes. Unfortunately, two of them are the “merda-storm” (per Russ Winters’ coined term) countries of Spain and Italy. That means all of the losses that would normally be distributed across a number of larger nations will now fall on the remaining two: Germany and France.  See Bernanke and Germany Wake up to a Merda Storm (“merda” is Latin for excrement or dung).

The Crumbling Pyramid

Charles Hugh Smith’s recent article succinctly describes the trigger for the Great Financial Crisis:  “…the collateral that supported this great inverted pyramid of leveraged debt vanished, and as a result the entire pyramid crumbled.”  See Is 2012 a Reprise of 2008? Since that time the government has played a game of “extend and pretend.”  Governments and their central bank agents are pumping up asset markets to deflect our suspicion that dubious collateral is supporting the debt pyramid.

Mr. Smith gives the all too real example of a $500,000 house purchased by a subprime buyer with only 3% down ($15,000).  The homeowner is thus leveraged 33-1.  Banks in turn packaged outrageously unsound mortgages like this one into mortgage backed securities (“MBS”), and then used these amalgamated pieces of financial trash as collateral for yet more loans.  Further, the banks then wrote credit derivatives on these securities and further expanded the inverted debt pyramid.  When the real estate market rises, all is well:  buyer, bank, MBS holder, and derivative purchaser all get bailed out.  However, when the real estate market falls, the financial implosion of a Great Financial Crisis ensues.

The banks refuse to deal with the underlying problem.   Instead, they rely on financial games.  Thus, in the above example:

… the mortgage is still valued on the books at $450,000, but the actual collateral — the house — is only worth $250,000. The idea being pursued by central banks around the world is that if they pump enough free money and liquidity into the system, and buy up impaired debt (i.e. debt in which the collateral has vanished), then the illusion that there is still some actual collateral holding up the market can be maintained.  See Is 2012 a Reprise of 2008?

Moments of Realization

Bill Buckler highlights the first moment of realization that collateral was irrevocably impaired.  During the Bear Stearns crisis, two of its hedge subprime hedge funds lost nearly all of their value due to the rapid decline in the subprime mortgage market.  To deal with the crisis Bear Stearns sought to sell the collateralized debt obligation in its funds:

For the one and only time in the GFC so far, a money centre bank tried to sell Collateralised  Debt Obligations (CDOs) on an actual market. That attempt lasted hours. When the auction was closed, the bids were coming in at 30 percent of the face value of the paper. The jig was up, the valuation of the collateral underpinning the entire banking system was revealed as fictitious.   (Emphasis in article)  Not much more than a year later, that collateral was transferred from the US banking SYSTEM to the Fed, which has maintained its fictitious “value” ever since. See No Freedom – No Money – No Markets

Mimicking the Federal Reserve, The European Central Bank is now accepting impaired collateral, including rapidly declining sovereign debt from Italy and Spain.  The dangerous fiction continues.

Are We About to Revisit the GFC of 2008?

The real question is whether or not we are about to reprise the Great Financial Crisis of 2008.  I would strongly suggest that Ben Bernanke and others are aware of the tenuous nature of the current iteration of the financial system.   Clearly Bernanke and company are self protecting:

Tying all the loose ends together is Wizard of Oz Ben Bernanke’s sudden attention to words like “shadow banking,” “collateral” and “vulnerabilities” in his speeches. For those with an elementary ability to connect the dots, this suggests that collateral in general — including the merda-storm variety — has been the subject of some late-night calls during Weekend at Benny’s.

And then there’s Ben, the master of obfuscation and butt covering. When this crisis hits, Ben will attempt to disassociate the bad collateral as a European problem and nothing with which he would ever be involved.  He will argue that owning several trillion in 1-2%-yielding long-duration sovereigns in a country (the US) with a 105% debt to GDP is nothing like what the ECB has done. A few years ago, a trillion-dollar portfolio of housing mortgages would have been considered a big deal. See Bernanke and Germany Wake up to a Merda Storm

Paraphrasing the author, Daniel Silva, only idiots and dead men ignore coincidences.  Three articles suddenly and recently appear which discuss the issue of impaired collateral supporting a vast financial inverted debt pyramid.    Coincidentally, the last time this confluence of warnings happened was 2008.  Turned out, the emperor was buck naked then.   Is 2012 a reprise for our sartorially and financially challenged emperor?

 

 

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

7
Mar 12

Going Broke on $350,000 and Other Sad Tales

In “Wall Street Bonus Withdrawal Means Trading Aspen for Cheap Chex,” Bloomberg reporter Max Abelson exposes once again how out of touch Wall Street is with Main Street.  Mr. Abelson shares with us the woes of a broker dealer, Andrew Schiff, the marketing director of New York-based Euro Pacific Capital, Inc.   Although he is comfortably within the top 1 percent of all US income earners, Mr. Schiff will earn “only” $350,000 this year.  A bit of Mr. Schiff’s hand-wringing: “I’m not Zen at all, and when I’m freaking out about the situation, where I’m stuck like a rat in a trap on a highway with no way to get out, it’s very hard….”  Why does he feel so trapped?   His compensation does not cover private school, a 4-month Connecticut summer rental, and an upgrade from his 1200 square foot Brooklyn duplex.

Mr. Schiff is Not Alone

Mr. Abelson further describes the fears and anxieties of Wall Street employees.   Bonuses on Wall Street fell 14% this past year to $19.7 billion, the lowest since 2008, with the resulting protestations of catastrophe utterly hyperbolic.   One recruiter referred to this situation as a “disaster.”  Wall Streeters responded in the following ways to this “disaster”: canceling ski trips to Whistler, Aspen and Tahoe; driving to Fairway Market to buy salmon on sale; selling two unused motorcycles (but keeping a Porsche); contemplating the horrors and ignominy of putting children in public school; reducing summer home rentals from four months to only one; turning down an offer to judge a wet T shirt competition in New Orleans;   shopping with coupons.   Oh the misery!

Wall Streeters lucky enough to have money have been able to continue luxuries such as $500 a month parking spots, owning (and garaging) two cars in New York City, $7500 a year for golf club membership, $17,000 a year for dog care, and membership in a gun club.

The Waning of Finance

After a well-earned cynical and sardonic chuckle, the serious response to the ludicrous descriptions above ought to be a different perspective on the “pity party pattern” itself.  The elimination of these egregious excesses could be a harbinger of a better, more moral and appropriate communal and economic future.  In “The Waning of Finance“, Martin Hutchinson describes the rising share percentage of financial firm profits compared to US Gross Domestic Product:

The increasing share of financial services in GDP has been inexorable since World War II. Taking the “finance and insurance” sector of the national accounts as a benchmark, its share of GDP rose from 2.4% of GDP in 1947 (the first year available) to a local peak of 4.3% of GDP in 1972. Then it was flat for a few years, surged during the 1980s to 6.0% of GDP in 1987 and surged again in the 1990s to a peak of 8.2% in 2001. That later peak was not surpassed during the housing finance boom of the mid-2000s, surprisingly, but was finally topped in 2010, in which the sector represented 8.5% of GDP. Thus the surge in financial services activity is consistent and long-term, nearly quadrupling as a share of GDP over the last 63 years.  See The Waning of Finance

Mr. Hutchinson is predicting the end of the economically unhealthy dominance of financial firms.   Federal Reserve largesse, coupled with zero interest rates, have until now provided the support for many of the most profitable financial activities.  However, in a new regulatory and tax environment, and with further tightening if there is another financial crash, many drivers of financial firm profits will become unprofitable:

  • Securitization -  a main driver of the housing bubble and subprime mortgage fiasco
  • Derivatives – meant to hedge exposure, but in reality smoke screens obfuscate corporate balance sheet problems
  • Credit Default Swaps – “The legal and payment uncertainties surrounding these instruments in any case make them almost pure gambling contracts. There will doubtless be another financial crash shortly, in which CDS are heavily implicated….”  See The Waning of Finance
  • High Frequency Trading – “institutions position their machines at the stock exchange in order to get earlier information of trading flows, on the basis of which they trade, is pure rent-seeking and a form of insider trading.”  See The Waning of Finance
  • Hedge Funds – their excessive fees eliminate any fiction of outperformance of traditional funds
  • Government Debt – because of central bank intervention, these funds have been encouraged to borrow short-term to buy long term government debt, a recipe for disaster.  See The Waning of Finance

What Will Bring About the End of the Financial Domination of the Economy?

Three factors, according to Hutchinson, will synergistically end the finance bubble:

First, there is a natural reaction against the excesses of recent decades, in which some of their more egregious business practices will no longer work and will be abandoned. Second, an end to the current excessively loose monetary policy will result in a dampening of speculation and a reduction (much of it the hard way, through bankruptcy) in systemic leverage. Finally, the surge of regulation through Dodd-Frank and the equivalent EU regulations will itself dampen activity in the sector, forbidding some practices and making others uneconomic. Just as deregulation from the 1970s encouraged the growth of the financial services sector so new regulations, imposed ineptly, will cut it back as they did in the 1930s. See The Waning of Finance

And I can cite one more personal anecdotal harbinger of the coming end of the financial bubble:   A fund manager of one of the premier Wall Street firms lamented how difficult it was for his firm to attract the best talent out of business school.  The best and the brightest young and new business professionals are gravitating to Silicon Valley and to the emerging social media companies.

Where talent flows and the bubble blows, so does the next big one?  But further discussion of the bursting of this bubble is a blog for another day.  Perhaps some of this talent will migrate even into math, science and manufacturing.

 

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

20
Feb 12

The State of Things

At a meeting of corporate counsel I spoke with Kenneth Starr, a former federal appeals court judge and Solicitor General of the United States.   Judge Starr opined that recent Supreme Court rulings demonstrated a tilt toward the conservative wing of the Court.  On the other hand, I argued that the Supreme Court was really split between statist versus libertarian philosophies.  Statism is the theory that political and economic planning power should be concentrated in the state, in effect weakening the individual or the community.  Libertarians hold the opposite view: we should maximize individual rights and minimize the power of the state.  Further, they decry Supreme Court decisions that have focused on maximizing the power of the state at the expense of the individual and the community.  After pausing for a moment, Judge Starr agreed that statism versus libertarianism may be a better way to frame the debate occurring in the US Supreme Court.

2012 is an election year.  Republicans and Democrats seem to be drawing battle lines, but in fact little difference exists between the two parties.  Both espouse statist solutions to America’s economic woes.  The Republicans would utilize the state to enforce a conservative social agenda (pro-life, marital fidelity, “family values”) and channel money to the defense complex.  Democrats would utilize the state to enforce a seemingly different agenda: pro-choice, mandatory medical insurance, social equality and a secure network of social services (unemployment insurance, social security, welfare).  Except for Ron Paul, who has been marginalized, no one debates the proper role of the state.  All the candidates give lip service to reducing budget deficits, but little serious discussion to the proper role of the state.

The Long Emergency

Current economic policy demonstrates the state’s overbearing hand.   Doug Noland, in A New Bull Market?  analyzes current government economic policies.   We have had four years of unprecedented economic stimulus with, among other artifices: zero interest rates, Federal Reserve asset purchases, economic stimulus, and Federal Reserve participation in worldwide liquidity operations (outright money printing).  Further, these unprecedented economic interventions show no signs of abating.   On the contrary, The Federal Reserve trumpets that it will keep interest rates at near zero through 2014.  Further, the Fed and the Treasury have assumed the role of supporting the stock market, housing prices, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, private banks and virtually decreeing the current artificial 2% inflation rate.  And even worse, no one in a position of policy or decision making seems self consciousness or regretful that these policies go on and on without an exit strategy.

We arrived here through past government interventions and bailouts.  The history of bailouts is long and undistinguished:  The Penn Central Railroad (1970); Lockheed (1971); Franklin National Bank (1974); New York City (1975); Chrysler (1980); Latin American Debt Crisis (1982); Continental Illinois National Bank (1984);  Savings &Loans (1989);  Mexico (1994); Russia (1998); Long Term Capital Management (1998);  Airline Industry (2001);  Bear Stearns (2008); Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (2008); AIG (2008); Auto Industry (2008);  Troubled Asset Relief Program – leading banks (2008); Citigroup (2008); and Bank of America (2009).  See History of U.S. Gov’t Bailouts; Top 6 U.S. Government Financial Bailouts; A Brief History of Government Bailouts; Are Financial Crises Alike?; A New Bull Market?

In every bailout we pay a high price for these statist solutions to economic problems.  A bailout is nothing more than a monetary transfer.   Instead of bondholders or shareholders in flawed enterprises taking a loss, the US taxpayer, essentially all of us, are paying for the mistakes of others.  This practice is a cowardly undermining of the essence of capitalism.   In true capitalism we would punish failure and reward success.  This government cowardice also distorts the legal system, as the government unilaterally claims a superior economic right over other creditors to economic relief.

Statism, Capitalism and Freedom

Ideally, capitalism and freedom are intertwined; that is, we are free to make mistakes. Yes, in this scenario our mistakes are punished in the marketplace.   But the rule of law in this scenario can also proceed as intended; that is, a poorly run enterprise can go through bankruptcy and either liquidate or reorganize.   If we want political freedom, we need economic freedom.  It is risky and sometimes painful, but the imprudent among us need to be economically punished and the rightful parties, rather than the entire electorate, need to bear the losses.

What Questions Should We Be Asking?

The political debate should ask the hard questions:

  • Why is the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates at zero until 2014 when we are supposedly in the fourth year of a recovery?
  • If we are in the fourth year of a recovery why are we fiddling with the capital markets with Operation Twist and talk of QE 3?
  • With unprecedented levels of fiscal and monetary stimulus, why has government intervention produced only below average and mediocre economic growth? Why is there no recovery in housing prices?  Or no growth in jobs?
  • Why is the Federal Reserve targeting 2% inflation when the legal mandate is no inflation?
  • Why is the Federal Reserve artificially supporting the stock market?
  • When will we ever return to a “normal economy” without the need for outsized deficit spending and monetary stimulus?
  • Why are we privatizing profits and socializing losses?

These are but some of the important questions.   The key question to ask is where did genuine capitalism go?  We pride ourselves as the land of free market capitalism.  Unfortunately, it has not been practiced in the United States since the 1920’s.  Right now we have fascism, state socialism, crony capitalism, but certainly not the real thing.  And that is scary.  Someone should be asking where free market capitalism went.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

30
Dec 11

The Road to Financial Nihilism

Nihilism is defined as “the total rejection of established laws and institutions.”  We are currently living through an age of financial nihilism.  Nihilism is also usually associated with radical elements that reject all authority.   I would submit that business elites and the political establishment are spawning political, legal and financial nihilism.

The Great Financial Crisis in the fall of 2008 led us on this path.  Perhaps it started with the best of intentions to save the financial system, but the unintended consequences of intended financial actions has negated any good from these efforts.  Let’s look at the particular elements of this sad condition:

  • Zero Interest Rates – When a market sets interest rates, important information is conveyed to market participants.   Interest rates in a free market environment measure risk of repayment, a fair rate of return and the potential for inflation.  When the Federal Reserve anchors interest rates at near zero for “an extended period of time,” investors can no longer make long-term rationale investment decisions. Thus, money is likely to be mal-invested in uneconomical projects or speculation increases in economically sensitive commodities such as oil, metals and grain.
  • Suspension of Mark to Market Accounting – At the start of the financial crisis, Congress leaned on the Financial Accounting Standards Board to suspend “mark to market” accounting (that is, the valuing of an asset in the most honest way, that is, taking into account its impairment or loss of value) .  In its most basic form, this is just plain dishonesty.   This dubious practice spread to banks in Europe as well.   Thus, there is no transparency in bank balance sheets; we (and even the banks themselves) simply can no longer believe the numbers on any institutional balance sheets. The result is that European banks are no longer willing to lend to one another.   Why?  These banks are now leveraged as much as 50-1, thus only a 2% drop in asset prices puts them at risk of failure.  We know that sovereign European bonds have dropped much more than 2%.   Thus, it is likely there is little or no real collateral to support a loan. See Art Cashin Exposes the Behind the Scenes Panic in Europe. With housing prices continuing in decline in the United States, I would suspect that many US banks too are hiding losses, and are in more dire straits than they or the Administration admits.
  • Stress Tests – To reassure the public, both the Federal Reserve and the European Banking Authority ran stress tests on large banks.  Dexia (Belgium’s largest company) passed the most recent round of these “stress tests,” and then failed within three months.   Irish banks failed four months after their 2010 round of these tests.  See How Did Europe’s Bank Stress Test Give Dexia a Clean Bill of Health?  Bank of America and Citigroup shares have plummeted in 2011.  The Federal Reserve performed similar stress tests on these and other major American banks.  How credible were our “stress tests?”
  • Eroding the Sanctity of Brokerage Accounts – The collapse of MF Global revealed that a brokerage firm could appropriate segregated customer accounts for its own uses.  It appears that MF Global circumvented US laws on account segregation by pledging customer accounts against a repo agreement in London.  Now, customers may never recover their monies.  See MF Global: The SERIOUS Issue Reaches Mainstream Media.  Karl Denninger points out that the standard brokerage agreement permits hypothecation and re-hypothecation, meaning that your brokerage account can be pledged to support a brokerage company or bank loan.  Since derivatives have preference over depositors, customer’s segregated accounts funds are at risk.
  • Eroding the Sanctity of Real Property – To speed securitization of mortgages, the banks created an alternative mortgage registration system which bypassed centuries-old rules of settled property law.  A recent report documents the disastrous consequences:

… “thanks to the Mortgage Electronic Registry System’s (MERS) failure to accurately complete and/or publically record property conveyances in the frenzy of banks securitizing home loans and ins subsequent foreclosure actions, neighbors of a foreclosed property (with a sequential conveyance) as well as a foreclosed property itself will have unclear boundaries and clouded/unmarketable titles making it difficult, if not impossible, for these homeowners to sell their properties and for subsequent purchasers to obtain title insurance on the property.”

The report goes on to point out that courts have criticized the MERS model as flawed and have ruled against MERS’ stance to foreclosure. MERS is described as being “wholly inaccurate and not allowing homeowners to fight foreclosures because it [MERS] shields the true owner of a mortgage in public records.” See Study Claims that MERS Destroyed the Chain of Title and Consequently, the Housing Market

And worse yet, in sorting through the avalanche of subsequent foreclosures, mortgage servicers have filed fraudulent affidavits and false documentation. See e.g., Nevada Files First Criminal Charges in Robo-Signing Case

  • Greek Credit Default Swaps – In good faith, buyers purchased credit default swaps on Greek bonds to hedge against a potential default.   The European authorities strong-armed banks and other investors to accept “voluntary” 50% haircuts on Greek bonds.  Because of this “voluntary” characterization the credit default swaps were not triggered.  With Spain, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and other countries suffering huge losses on their bonds, is it likely that investors will invest in these bonds when the hedge of a credit default swap can be negated through European financial authority fiat?   See Credit Default Swaps Useless as Hedge Against Default
  • Federal Reserve Intervention in Markets – So far, when stock markets have faltered, the Federal Reserve has come to the rescue through quantitative easing (QE1& 2) or Operation Twist.  Thus, investors cannot know the true value of any stock since the Federal Reserve will not allow it to fall to a market-determined price.   Similarly, with zero interest rates and purchase of mortgage- backed securities, the Federal Reserve will not allow house values to fall to market clearing prices.
  • Failure to Prosecute – Outside of a handful of insider trader prosecutions there has been no attempt to prosecute the malefactors of Wall Street. Excuses range from opining that the practices were legal, to the difficulty in building a case.  In the Savings and Loan crisis of the early 1990s the same difficulties existed, yet 1100 prosecutions were brought with 800 banks executives sent to jail.  See In Financial Crisis, No Prosecutions of Top Figures

Real World Consequences

We have eliminated price discovery from our markets.  We have neither permitted stocks to fall nor interest rates to rise.  Instead of prosecuting the banks that caused this problem, we shower them with interest free loans from the Federal Reserve so they can speculate or earn risk free profits by re-depositing funds with the Federal Reserve.  Thus, capital is being diverted from sound investments and used for speculative purposes or worse.

European financial authorities have destroyed the efficacy of hedging sovereign bonds in their handling of the Greek bond haircuts.  And thus another important market is being destroyed.

More ominously, Karl Denninger reports that in the wake of the MF Global failure, farmers are eschewing the hedging of crops through commodity futures and instead selling directly to food companies.  Thus, price stability will be diminished and consumers will ultimately pay higher prices.

The failure to “mark to market” and run honest stress tests has resulted in a freezing of interbank loans (a classic credit squeeze) and resulted in a silent run on banks, as UBS reports (bold face type in original text):

European banks are making great use of the ECB’s overnight deposit facility. Last night they parked $590 billion at the ECB breaking the record they had set the night before. They are clearly unwilling to lend to other European banks, highlighting the distrust and fear in the interbank marketplace.

The distrust on the streets is said to be growing also. Barroom gossip says that safe-deposit boxes are in a demand that borders on frenzy. They allow you to take your Euros and covert them into something of value (gold, Swiss Francs, etc.) and sock it away in a safe place.

 Others are said to be buying property in London and elsewhere lest you awake one day and discover that your Euros have reverted to drachmas or lira.

 Savvy bankers are said to be setting up personal and communal trusts domiciled in places like the Bahamas, the Caymans or the Isle of Jersey. Some banks are offering depository accounts denominated (and repayable) in alternate currencies like the dollar or the yen.

 We think a Lehman-like event would most likely be triggered by a run on a bank or a series of banks. The scramble for currency (value) protection among the public could turn into that bank run in the same way that a crowd can instantly turn into a mob. Watch the money flows out of Greece and Italy very carefully. The pot continues to bubble. See Art Cashin Exposes the Behind the Scenes Panic in Europe

If the Administration, The Federal Reserve and the European Authorities had set out to destroy capitalism, free markets and the current financial system, they could not have done a better job.   Free markets and a free people are intertwined.  The road to financial nihilism is ultimately a very dangerous path.

 

 

 

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

9
Dec 11

This Dimon Doesn’t Have it Rough Enough

Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan Chase, is back in the news railing against those who bash the rich:

Dimon was responding Wednesday to a question at an investor conference about the hostile political environment towards banks.

“Acting like everyone who’s been successful is bad and that everyone who is rich is bad — I just don’t get it,” said Dimon at the conference, which was organized by Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

Dimon said he’s worked on Wall Street for much of his life and contributed his fair share.

“Most of us wage earners are paying 39.6 percent in taxes and add in another 12 percent in New York state and city taxes and we’re paying 50 percent of our income in taxes,” Dimon said in defense of his fellow Wall Street bankers. See Jamie Dimon Rails Against “Rich is Bad” Talk

Are We Bashing the Rich or the Well Connected?

America is a land of opportunity.  Children of poor immigrants can grow up to be President, entrepreneurs, brilliant scientists or even CEOs of Fortune 500 companies.  Thus, Americans venerate a Steve Jobs or a Bill Gates.  Not that these individuals are without detractors, but they are admired for starting from scratch, innovating, and filling a market need.  Often these individuals single-handedly create the market for their products and services. See All Millionaires are not Created Equal

Let’s examine why Jamie Dimon and other bankers are less admired and often vilified.  Note the deft sleight of hand in Mr. Dimon’s answer to the question: the question posed concerned the hostile environment toward banks.  Mr. Dimon’s response is that he does not understand why the public thinks that everyone who is successful is bad.  He in fact never answered the question of why everyone hates banks.

At the core of the hatred of banks (and perhaps Mr. Dimon himself) is crony capitalism.  Mr. Dimon’s “success” is owed largely to the unholy alliance between the Bush and Obama Administrations and the Too Big to Fail Banks.  Let’s examine the blessings the government has bestowed on Mr. Dimon:

  • Bear Stearns – JP Morgan Chase and Mr. Dimon merged with the “failing” Bear Stearns, paying $10 per share for a company that had recently traded at $93 per share.  The Federal Reserve then made a $29b non-recourse loan to JP Morgan secured only by the mortgage backed securities of Bear Stearns.  Thus, the Federal Reserve could not seize JP Morgan Chase assets, if the Bear Stearns collateral proved insufficient to repay the loan.  See Seeking Fast Deal, JP Morgan Quintuples Bear Stearns Bid, Wikipedia
  • Secret Loans from the Federal Reserve – From 2007-2009, the Federal Reserve made $7.7 trillion of secret loans to 190 financial institutions, resulting in profits of $13b.  These loans were at below market rates, virtually free, ensuring profit for the banks. Bloomberg, which made the Freedom of Information Act request, estimated that JP Morgan profited in the amount of almost $458m.  Mr. Dimon did not disclose these loans or the banks’ need to his shareholders:

JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO Jamie Dimon told shareholders in a March 26, 2010, letter that his bank used the Fed’s Term Auction Facility “at the request of the Federal Reserve to help motivate others to use the system.” He didn’t say that the New York-based bank’s total TAF borrowings were almost twice its cash holdings or that its peak borrowing of $48 billion on Feb. 26, 2009, came more than a year after the program’s creation. See Secret Fed Loans Gave Banks $13 Billion Undisclosed to Congress

  • Zero Interest Rates – The zero interest rate policy of the Federal Reserve continues to permit banks to borrow at below market rates, thus enhancing bank profits at the expense of savers.
  • Compensation – While being rescued by the Federal Reserve, JP Morgan Chase’s board awarded Mr. Dimon a $17m bonus for 2009. In 2010, Mr. Dimon made $20.8m.  JP Morgan partisans will argue that this was modest compared to industry peers.  Should US taxpayers, those of us who ultimately stand behind these loans, reward executives with large compensation packages?  Unlike the situations of most of the rest of us, JP Morgan Chase makes available to its top executives tax advantageous programs such as the permitting tax deferral of compensation, 401k plans, a defined benefit pension plan and use of the company plane.  If terminated without cause, Mr. Dimon would receive cash and stock awards valued at $16.7m. See Are CEOs Paid too Much: Not All of Them; JP Morgan Chase CEO Gets $17 Million N0-Cash Bonus; Elements of Executive Compensation (JPM); JP Morgan Chase 2010 proxy

Being Rich Isn’t the Problem

Yes, there is income inequality and we have heard endlessly about the elite 1% profiting at the expense of the 99% of ordinary Americans.  But the real hostility goes deeper than just these income disparities.   There is a good reason why Mr. Dimon chose not to discuss the hostile environment toward banks.  He is well aware of why it exists:  the American public has been treated to the spectacle of secret loans to banks; CEOs have been permitted to keep their jobs after nearly destroying their own banks and the US economy; too generous executive compensation practices and perquisites continue which ignore the fact that taxpayers needed to bail out these institutions (and will probably have to do so again);  banks still fail to undertake serious loan modification programs for underwater homeowners; they hoard excess reserves at the Federal Reserve rather than make loans to stimulate the real economy; they attempt to impose fees on cash withdrawals from ATMs;  and finally and disgracefully,  these banks have not been  prosecuted.

Mr. Dimon, the focus is on you and other bankers, not necessarily “the rich.”   Perhaps we need more hard hitting articles like the Bloomberg piece on secret loans to banks, to focus the attention on the true issues, not bogus articles of class warfare.   Unfortunately, neither the press nor the Administration has been rough enough on Mr. Dimon.

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

12
Oct 11

Potent Directors, Cargo Cults and Other Myths

Western economies are waiting to be saved.   Every day we learn of another rumor of a large European Financial Stabilization Fund, issuance of a Eurobond, rescue of a country (Greece), or state-sponsored recapitalization of a failing bank.   The US is not much different.  Markets rise and fall on rumors of QE3 or a promise from the Obama Administration of more economic stimulus programs.  In fact, today markets are rising on the hopes of another European bailout plan.   Financial writers and investors fervently believe that if we can only find the right fiscal and monetary formula, economic growth and financial markets will soar.   Unfortunately,   little in recent history supports these beliefs.

The Potent Director Fallacy

Robert Prechter in Conquer the Crash coined the term the “potent directors” fallacy.  The fallacy in a nutshell:

 It’s nearly impossible to find a treatise on macroeconomics that does not assert or assume that the Federal Reserve Board has learned to control both our money and our economy. Many believe that it also possesses immense power to manipulate the stock market. The very idea that it can do these things is false. It is what I call the ‘Potent Directors’ Fallacy.

In reality — the Fed has no such power.  See The Fed is Not in Control: Potent Directors Fallacy

Prechter catalogs the stop and start policies of the Fed which led to the internet stock boom and crash.  The centerpiece of poor policy making was the post internet boom decision to slash the federal funds rate thirteen  times from 2001-2003, which led to the housing boom and the subsequent seventeen   increases from 2004-2006, which led to the housing bust.

Even the start of QE1 could not stop the 2008-2009 plunge in the stock market.  The market did not bottom for several months until March 2009.  QE2 petered out in June of this year, the economy slowed, and once again the market declined.

Perception Management

Charles Hugh Smith points out that we have stopped serious policy making.  Instead policy makers have focused on managing the perceptions of stock market investors and consumers, and now deal in marketing.   American and European central banks and politicians wish to project the illusion that they are still in control.  In his critique of the endless reassurances from Angela Merkel and Nicholas Sarkozy that European banks can be recapitalized and the Euro saved, Smith exposes the vague programs of both of these leaders and our Federal Reserve Bank:

Merkel and Sarkozy’s dog and pony show is perception management ripped right from the Federal Reserve’s playbook. The ontological foundation of the Fed’s playbook is this: the problem is all perception. If the great unwashed populace of debt-serfs perceives that all is well and secure, and the Mommy State has tucked them safely into bed, then they will once again start borrowing and spending without a care for either reality or the future. See The Uncredible Dog and Pony Show: Merkel and Sarkozy

 Fundamentally, the perception management approach is incorrect.  Rather, we must look at the facts of our situation, the bottom line as it were, the areas of real inequities, incompetence and fraudulent policy.  At some point, we must lift the fog of spin surrounding what is really happening:

The problems of the global economy are not based in perception, but in the reality of prices, balance sheets and income statements, vast concentrations of wealth and power, precarious systemic imbalances, ruthless exploitation, and command economies mismanaged by Central State/Bank policy and manipulation.  See The Uncredible Dog and Pony Show: Merkel and Sarkozy

Cargo Cults, Deus Ex Machina and Other Delusions

On October 10, we had yet another monster rally based on vague bank rescue plans.  Previously markets have rallied on yet another in the endless series of Greek bailouts or speeches from Ben Bernanke hinting at QE3.  Each time investors are sucked into markets only to have their hopes dashed by reality.

Sometimes, great literature uses a plot device known as deus ex machina.  An inextricable problem is solved through a contrived, unexpected or implausible intervention.  In Lord of the Flies, a naval officer suddenly appears to rescue the wayward boys stranded on an island.  Similarly, “cargo cults” appeared during World War II, wherein primitive societies observed Japanese and American soldiers unloading manufactured goods from airplanes.  After the war, the natives would establish elaborate religious rituals, such as building landing strips or copies of radios emulating the Japanese and Americans, hoping that “cargo” would soon land.

Financial media watch every move of the Federal Reserve, and European central bankers and politicians hope to divine when the recovery will appear.  Each time the “solutions” deliver less than promised and the economy and markets sink.  Why does anyone continue to believe the central bankers and politicians?  Why is there so little independent thinking and critical analysis? How far have we progressed from belonging to our own version of a cargo cult?

 

 

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

13
Sep 11

Re-Arranging the Furniture

Rarely do I look at the myriad sale flyers that seem to be staples of our mail these days.  However, my wife called my attention to a going out of business sale.  Bograd’s Fine Furniture, a store with deep roots in Paterson, N.J., sent out an unusual closing announcement.  It was not the usual notice trumpeting the final days of the company (for the umpteenth time) and hawking goods at deep discounts for a final selling splash. Rather, the announcement seemed from the heart of the owner and his family.  Its message encapsulated what is wrong with our economy and the burdens government puts on small business.

History

On August 1, 1930, two immigrant brothers opened a furniture store in Paterson, NJ.  Five years later they built a bigger store on Main Street in that city. The store remained there for over sixty years.

In 1975, I began my clerkship for a Superior Court Judge sitting in Paterson.  I walked by Bograd’s every day on the way to the government parking lot.  At that point, my wife and I were married for three years, but we had always lived in student housing.  We had our first rental apartment, which needed furnishing, at that same time.  Bograd’s carried quality brands that we could only dream about but could not afford.   Even then, our belief was that we should save and buy quality goods rather than settle for inferior goods.  Bograd’s represented quality, albeit at higher than department store prices.  We window shopped a lot more often than we bought.

At about the same time, Paterson was becoming a dangerous city, where once had been a prosperous town.  The population declined nearly 5% in the 1970’s.  White residents fled to nearby suburbs and now make up only 13% of the population.  Poverty is rampant, with 29% of families below the poverty line.  As in many urban areas, quality stores abandoned Paterson for the suburbs of Bergen and Passaic counties.  Bograd’s, however, held out until 1996 when it moved to a warehouse showroom in a suburban area near major highways.

The End of an Era

Instead of the traditional “going out of business sale,” the Bograd family calls their closing event “Bograd’s Last and Best Sale.”   Even though the store will no longer be operating, Mr. Bograd and his company  will  “be around after the sale is over operating out of our warehouse until every order is delivered, every customer satisfied.”

Below is a summary of the company’s decision to close.   It is a microcosm of what ails small American businesses.  I will provide commentary on each item:

  • We cannot and will not compete with stores who have lowered their standards by selling low quality merchandise.  We have always sold high end American-made furniture, often pieces signed by the craftsman while our competitors are bringing in low quality pieces from Indonesia and China. Comment – US free trade policy has permitted the importation of low quality, often shoddy, low price furniture.  How can a high quality US manufacturer expect to compete with near slave labor, foreign work conditions?  One cannot compare beautifully finished high end domestically made furniture and imports from China.
  • We will not employ a low quality, low paid sales force that cannot provide outstanding customer service.  Comment – Customers view items like furniture as disposable, so quality service is no longer factored into the price.  Only low price matters.  The US educational system produces employees without the educational background or mindset to invest years in developing expertise in high-quality furniture manufacturing or sales.
  • Given the state of the mortgage market we cannot refinance our store which we own or obtain favorable financing terms from our supplier.  Mentioning that we are in the furniture industry ends discussions with lenders.  Comment – The failure to resolve our banking crisis and forcing the banks to write off bad loans has tightened credit markets.  Tight credit has had the most impact on small businesses.  Banks would rather hold excess reserves with the Federal Reserve than take on more risky lending.
  • As a small business we receive no support from any level of government.  Comment – Complex business regulations coupled with the uncertainty of Obamacare make it almost impossible for a small business to succeed.  Government policy openly favors large enterprises, who also happen to be major campaign contributors, at the expense of the small business person.
  • Decline in trust between and among retailers, banks, and suppliers. Comment – Government policies which created the housing bubble and other speculative bubbles inevitably lead to an economic bust.  Stop-and-start economic policies destroy trust between economic parties. See Bograd’s Fine Furniture Latest Victim of Tough Economy, Eight Decades of Selling Furniture Coming to a Close, Bograd’s Historic Closing Sale – The End of an Era

Left unsaid is a major change in our culture and values.   As young adults we understood that to buy quality furniture we would need to save and defer our major purchases. When we bought a house, rooms remained empty until we could afford quality furnishings.  In a culture of instant consumer credit and shoddy goods, that ethic of saving and deferring gratification has eroded, placing a firm like Bograd’s at a disadvantage.

American Jobs Act

The much awaited announcement of President Obama’s American Jobs Act does little for the small business person. Small business is the lynchpin for both creating new jobs and for economic recovery in general.  Like Bograd’s, there are thousands of small businesses hanging on by their economic finger tips.   A large labor union (teacher, police or fire) or a large financial business (banks, insurance companies) gets the government’s attention and fiscal favor, but  if one is a small business, I guess one might  just fade into economic history, like the 81-year old Bograd’s.

Gresham’s Law says that bad money drives out good money.  In the case of Bograd’s Fine Furniture, bad furniture drove out quality furniture.  We have flawed government policy to thank, and a consequent culture which would rather spend today than invest in the future.

 

 

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

5
Sep 11

Insanity

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

When we examine the headlines, this oft-quoted phrase becomes increasingly relevant.  We accept public policy errors with barely a whimper.  We are either too comfortable with the status quo or paralyzed by fear of the unknown.  Worse, perhaps we have lost our ability to question critically.  Maybe all the aforementioned are true at once.  Let’s examine some of the current insanity.

Living on Flood Plains

Our family was raised near the Passaic River in New Jersey.  In high school in 1970, my brother did an in-depth study of flooding in the Passaic River Valley.   Even then, after relatively modest storms, flooding of the towns of Lincoln Park and Wayne, NJ, was all too common.  My brother interviewed then State Senator (later Governor) Thomas Kean.  Kean was well aware of the problem and had worked with the Army Corps of Engineers to devise a plan to stop the flooding.  A new dam was needed, but the project withered from political opposition.   Now, more than forty years later, the area routinely floods in these and other Passaic River towns.  No dam has been built.  Worse, overbuilding since the seventies has intensified, leaving more families in harm’s way.   Now, with full media drama, we are treated to heroic emergency rescues, and heart rending scenes of home evacuations and lost possessions.

My guess is that many of these homeowners will receive sizeable checks from federal flood insurance programs.  We the taxpayers are subsidizing the choices of individuals to build homes on flood plains.   Although I believe there is a role for a federal emergency response, Ron Paul was right to question the need for a federal response to Hurricane Irene. Even the liberal Huffington Post recognized the insanity in some of these programs.

Federal disaster relief programs have their faults. The National Flood Insurance Program, originally designed to force homeowners to take financial responsibility for living in flood plains, has encouraged development in unsafe areas. So too have federal levee and flood control programs. See A Natural Disasters History Lesson for Ron Paul

Insanity is to encourage overbuilding in flood plains, watch hurricanes and lesser storms destroy houses, and then having taxpayers reward reckless builders and homeowners with monies from the Treasury.  We need to at least begin the process of requiring our citizens to acknowledge the risks they take in their choices.  Financial responsibility should reside with the homeowner not the taxpayer.

Boards and CEOs

Much hoopla surrounds the naming of a new CEO for a major American company.   Too often, we find out later that the Board of Directors never fully investigated the candidate to explore the “soft issues” such as management style.  And then comes the consequences for the company and its shareholders.  We have two recent cases of high profile executive terminations:  Jeffrey Kindler at Pfizer and Robert Kelly at Bank of New York Mellon.

In both instances the Board discovered after the CEO was ensconced that his abrasive management style was alienating other key senior managers.  The result was dysfunctional management decision making.

This woeful tale occurs quite often.  The Board becomes enamored of a brilliant, seemingly charismatic executive.  But if the Board did its homework, it would discover that sometimes an executive is a brilliant individual contributor, but a mediocre or too often a terrible manager.   Given the hierarchical nature of corporations and the fear of losing one’s job, subordinates do not speak out about their bosses.  Or if the rare employee has the courage to speak out, the Board rationalizes complaints:  such employees are disaffected complainers, or sore losers in the climb to the top.

When corporate performance inevitably founders, the mass exodus of senior talent or the disclosure of a scandal catapults the Board into action.    Horrors!  All those complainers may have been correct.  Secret sessions occur, the Board develops some backbone and fires the executive, but tells the world that the executive is retiring or resigning to spend more time with their family.  Worse, Boards do not deal harshly enough with a mistake in hiring:  they reward the offending executive with a large severance package and a proclamation of gratitude for taking the company to a new, higher level.  The end result: a cynical group of employees and shareholders.

See Inside Pfizer’s Palace Coup, Robert Kelly: Bank Fired Him Because of His ‘Abrasive’ Management Style Lowered Morale

QE3

Wall Street continues to beat the drums for a third round of quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve.  Peter Tchir of TF Market Advisors debunks the effectiveness of QE2.  The stock market may have gone higher but that may have been related to the problems in Europe that lowered the value of the dollar or the lower stock price levels then (1050 S&P 500) versus   now (1215 S&P 500).   The “wealth effect” related to rising stock prices did little to improve the lot of the average American.  Unemployment remained high, house prices did not recover and wages stagnated.  Finally, there were dramatic increases in commodity prices raising the cost of key items such as food and energy.  Yet, the Federal Reserve continues to hint at QE3 and major investment banks view it as a given.  See QE3, What’s not to Like?

Repeating Insanity

What has happened to critical questioning of key institutions: Congress, the Executive Branch, the Federal Reserve and even corporate boards of directors?    Policy initiatives are floated every day in the press, one crazier than the next, and few pundits ask why? As crises seem to occur without respite, my guess is that this obtuseness will not serve us well.

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

5
Aug 11

The Meal Was Great…Part II

Dinner with friends included lots of discussion points that resonated and reminded us of our corporate working lives.   While these points were clear to us as working persons, our perspectives from the outside render these points just as important.  The revealing fact that hits home so closely is:  Americans are being impacted by flawed policies and assumptions whether employed or not, or impoverished or not.

  • Financial Sector Dominance – Government policy encouraged the growth of the financial sector at the expense of the “real economy.”  Glass Stegall, which separated banking operations from trading operations, was repealed by Graham-Dodd.   Devilishly complex financial instruments became Wall Street fee generating devices at the expense of traditional lending.    These firms became employers of choice for talented university graduates.
  • The Short Cut Society – Instead of saving for a house, a vacation or a new appliance we were happy to use credit cards or second mortgage lines for instant gratification.   Instead of a boring career in manufacturing, better a Wall Street trader or hedge fund manager.  CEOs expected huge compensation packages regardless of performance quality.
  • Spin vs. Truth – Shading of the truth became a national obsession.  Instead of honest reporting of inflation statistics, hedonic adjustments lowered the consumer price index, depriving social security recipients and federal pensioners of earned cost of living adjustments.   CEOs spun disappointing earnings results taking write offs, obfuscating the accounting or lowering earnings guidance so that when earnings were finally announced “they beat expectations.”   Congress is no better, promising “smoke and mirrors” debt reduction plans with little, if any, real deficit reduction.
  • Lack of Political Leadership – The debt reduction exercise is one more example of the lack of leadership at the Chief Executive and Congressional levels.  Politicians are more concerned about preening before cameras than serious statesmanship. Bipartisanship seems like a quaint relic of a bygone era.
  • Congress for Sale – Given the enormous cost of congressional races, representatives are in a constant search for dollars from corporations and other large contributors.  Thus, we have Congress captured by special interests.  Congress has long forgotten the middle class voter.  The appearance is that Congress is totally beholden to the corporate sector and that corporations appear entitled to special relief any time they are in need.
  • Complexity – Complexity pervades every part of our political and economic system.  Complexity is used to muddy rather than clarify.  The tax code, Obamacare and financial reform are the latest examples of overly complex legislation and accompanying regulation.  Only an army of lawyers can navigate through these legal minefields.  Conveniently, citizens are kept in the dark and small businesses cannot afford to compete with larger enterprises.
  • Rise of the Nanny State – We recently had New York’s ridiculous attempt to regulate kickball, dodge ball, waffle ball and Red Rover as dangerous activities needing state oversight and a permit.   See Classic Kid Games Like Kickball Deemed Unsafe by State to Increase Summer Camp Regulation.  This is emblematic of a society which demands a legislative or regulatory solution to every problem.   Businesses must be protected against failing (GM, Chrysler, Citicorp, AIG),  employees must be permitted leaves for such mundane diseases as chronic sinus infections (Family and Medical Leave Act), and the public must be protected against carcinogens such as the sun and salt.    Every aggrieved person must have a day in court.  Spill hot coffee on oneself, bring a lawsuit against McDonalds.  Play football and suffer an injury, sue the helmet manufacturer.  Somebody is always to blame and our legislative bodies are all too willing to protect us against life’s vicissitudes.
  • Free Trade– Say it fast and free trade sounds like a great idea.   Cheap foreign goods enrich our lives.   Thus, Ross Perot was ridiculed for saying that NAFTA’s giant sucking sound was American jobs heading for Mexico.   Mr. Perot sold American ingenuity short: American jobs are heading for China, India, Vietnam and a host of other low wage countries. These countries have few, if any, labor, anti- discrimination, family and medical leave, unemployment, child labor, environmental or safety laws.  American workers are being asked to compete against workers who are paid subsistence wages and afforded no protections.   Our politicians are only too willing to serve corporate interests at the expense of the American worker.
  • Immigration – Immigration is probably the purest example of selective enforcement of our laws.  It is difficult for American workers to compete against Chinese or Indian workers.  The problem is even greater as regards undocumented residents in our country.  Further, the cost of medical, education and municipal services is underwritten by the American taxpayer.  In places like Texas, Arizona and California this puts enormous strains on state and local budgets when education and medical services must be extended to undocumented residents.
  • Structural Unemployment – Technology and job outsourcing has added to shockingly high unemployment rates.  It is not clear whether any of these jobs will ever return. As we pointed out, zero interest rates lead to use of more labor saving capital equipment at the expense of hiring workers.  See The New York Times Finally Discovers Structural Unemployment. Hence, our employment problems may not be temporary but a permanent feature of the economic landscape.

 

All of the factors are intertwined.  In fact, they are negatively synergistic.   For example, a Congress that supports failed banks condemns savers and pensioners to miniscule return on savings, further compromising any incipient economic recovery.  A below trend economic recovery only encourages the exile of more jobs overseas so that corporations can retain profitability.

Believe it or not, dinner was pleasant and more.  But our conversational substance and concern for what is happening with our country and what is wrong with America indeed cast a cloud over all our thinking.  Along with other “ways that we were,” optimistic was also one of them, and that is much diminished.

After all this postulating about what is wrong, clearly what should come next are some hypotheses about solutions that can work.  A discussion for another blog.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

3
Aug 11

The Meal Was Great; Our Outlook, Not As Good

I had dinner the other day with two close friends, both former colleagues.  We are, in parlance, “men of a certain age:”   baby boomers, children of the sixties, sons of World War II veterans.  We all began our work lives in our twenties, worked for giant corporations, and turned jobs into long-term careers.  When first hired by our companies, we planned to stay just a couple of years and then move on to another company.  With the benefit of hindsight now, and the need for false humility ended, we can each gratefully admit that we enjoyed significant professional success, although none of us thought we would rise to the senior executive levels that we did.

We now occasionally get together for dinner and discuss our families, our current pursuits, how our former employer is doing and the general state of things.   Last time, we discussed what went wrong with America generally, why our children will not have long careers with large companies, and why they likely will not be as financially successful as we were.

We spoke about our fathers and the norms of their generation.  They fought in the War, returned and worked hard, and had few expectations about success or wealth.   They kept their noses to the grindstone and rarely complained.

We discussed the landscape of the corporations we went to work for.   When I was hired as a junior attorney, the General Counsel barely made five times my salary.  Bonuses were stingy and a modest number of stock options (in the hundreds of shares) were offered to a handful of our most senior executives.  Interestingly, it was generally a harmonious and engaging work environment. In contrast, by the time I retired, the Chairman and CEO made more than 400 times what an average employee made.  Employees were not nearly as engaged or happy.

The immediate catalyst for our wondering what has gone wrong with America was the current debate over the US debt ceiling.  I started to think back to the blogs I had written and tried to put together some hypotheses.  I caution the reader this is not a rigorous, but rather an impressionistic view of sociological, political and economic trends which shape the current state of affairs.   If it is insightful, I give tribute to good dinner conversation and fine friendship:

  • Loss of Shared Sacrifice – Perhaps it was the “Me Generation” of the 1960’s, but America has lost its sense of shared sacrifice; that is, the notion that we are all in this together and we rise or fall as one nation.   Instead we have an ethic of greed:   I want what I want and I want it now, everyone else be damned.
  • Out of Control Military Spending – Too much of America’s resources are spent in our defense budget.  Compounding this problem is a series of seemingly endless wars.  While we deploy hundreds of thousands of troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, our allies deploy hundreds.  Note that the German, Canadian, and Australian economies boomed, while ours stagnated.
  • The Volunteer Army – A volunteer army allows wars to be fought by other people’s children.  Thus, the popular outcry against wars or military spending is diminished because our own (privileged) sons and daughters are less likely to be involved.
  • Too Many Laws – The Wall Street Journal highlighted the growth in federal criminal law.  We over-criminalize too many areas of society.  One commentator archly noted that someone violates some law each day, often unaware of his lawbreaking conduct. See As Criminal Laws Proliferate, More are Ensnared
  • Unequal Enforcement of the Law – Perhaps since the OJ Simpson trial, our citizens cynically believe that if one hires a good enough lawyer, one literally can get away with murder.  This carries over to the belief if a corporation is big enough, especially a “too big to fail” financial institution, it will never be prosecuted.
  • Socialism for the Rich, Capitalism for the Poor – When the “too big to fail” institutions became insolvent, the Bush Administration, Congress and the Federal Reserve rushed in with a comprehensive program of TARP and zero interest rate lending.  The Obama Administration has continued these policies from the beginning.  Insolvent homeowners have been evicted from their homes, and many unemployed workers have exhausted their unemployment benefits.
  • Reckless Lending and Borrowing – The Federal Reserve was a major culprit in the growth of both public and private credit.  Instead of accepting the economic consequences of the internet bubble crash, Alan Greenspan reduced interest rates to below market levels to encourage real estate lending.   Subprime lending further inflated the housing bubble. Based on an inflated residential and commercial real estate market the economy boomed.  Assuming that this was permanent prosperity, debt was taken on at all levels: states and municipalities, corporations, homeowners and the federal government.  Now we cannot repay that debt.

While my dinner with friends continued all in one evening, Part Two will continue this discussion.

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark